Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 11:28:35 02/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 20, 2000 at 11:56:34, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On February 20, 2000 at 11:02:58, Fernando Villegas wrote: >>Maybe you cannot calculate >>every move possible to slve the game, but you know is solvable and so there is >>room to say that a better program is that capable of grasping a bigger amount >> of the relevants features, or, if you want, to perform the most practically >>satisfactory calculation. > >since the result of a game is not a result of BEST play from BOTH sides, >it makes not much sense to reduce or substitute a game with a result of it. > >information gets lost. > >in the moment chess is solved, you can substitute the game with the >result. > >since BOTH sides played only BEST moves. > >e.g. when the games comes into tablebases, suddenly shredder4 says: > >mate in 39 moves. than - in these kind of deterministic moments, you can >replace the rest of the game with the announcement: > >mate in 39 ! > >only when chess is completely solved, you should IMO replace >the game with 1-0/0-1 or draw. > >since we will never reach this (as it looks in the moment) >the programs guess. you have good programs guessing more, >and weaker programs guessing less. >or you can say they have a thesis. > >and not any thesis works. > >so when humans play. they have creative ideas. > >this makes chess a non-deterministic game. as long as it is not solved. > >in the moment you play e4 and shredderX says: mate in 81, you know: > >a) chess is solved >b) this move was 0-1 >c) it is a deterministic event now. > >as long as shredder says -0.45 >when you play e4 , or whatever evaluation, it is only guessing. > >that was my point. T: What you call "guessing" OR "thesis" is not but calculation, uncomplete, aproximative,etc, BUt calculation. To do that, you does not need a total solving of the problem, but just the best aproximative solution in a narrowed front. The game is not played in one shot from mone 1 o move 89, but it is a serie of positions or situations where , with limits, you can grasp some features and do some calculations that are mesnsurable in terms of better o worst grasping of the problem. Inside these limits, inside the structure of a position, you can and in fact you must calculate. Let me insist: is not the entire game what you must calculate or not, but a position. Call it guess if you want.Call it imperfect calculation. No matter what, the program or player with the best aproximate calculation to what should be best inside he position, wll do the best practical moves. Perhaps our problem is sinaxtic: perhaps you end to conceive calculation just as those exhaustive calculation you do when yo add a limited nuber of numbers. For me is just to take into account the features of a problem. Is that a guess? Fernando
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.